Proposal to bar acquitted MPs from Seimas for ten years

Legal experts have welcomed a proposal by the speaker of the Seimas to amend the constitution so that any MP found by the Constitutional Court to have violated the constitution, broken their oath, or committed a crime would be barred from returning to parliament for ten years, even if they resign before impeachment concludes, LRT reports.

Remigijus Žemaitaitis, an MP convicted of antisemitic remarks, has said he still intends to run for parliament again after his sentence is served. Under current rules, he faces no ten-year ban because his impeachment process was not completed by a Constitutional Court ruling. “When a criminal case ends with a conviction, the constitution does not provide for such sanctions,” said Agnė Širinskienė, chair of the “For Lithuania” democratic faction.

Žemaitaitis previously faced impeachment over the same antisemitic statements. The Constitutional Court ruled that he had violated his oath and grossly breached the constitution, but he avoided the ten-year ban by resigning his mandate. “It looks strange when someone can evade impeachment and then run in elections again,” said Speaker Juozas Olekas.

Olekas proposes applying the ten-year ban on holding offices requiring an oath to MPs who resign after the Constitutional Court finds they have broken their oath. Some legal experts support the idea. “Today, there is a very easy way to escape responsibility. Those loopholes should be closed, because everyone must answer for their actions,” said Vytautas Nekrošius, president of the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences.

“An inconsistency arises when in some cases quite strict restrictions on political careers are applied, and in others they are not,” Širinskienė added.

However, not all politicians agree. Raimondas Šukys, a colleague of Žemaitaitis, argues that resignation is already a form of accountability. “If an MP resigns, they have already taken responsibility, and in my opinion, that is sufficient,” he said, adding that voters should have the final say.

Others believe the proposed change could deter MPs from breaking their oath. “Perhaps such a regulatory change would help avoid people who are inclined to break their oath,” Širinskienė said.

Any such change would require amending the constitution, a process that would need 94 votes in the Seimas. “I don’t think this can be done in a month or two,” said Julius Sabatauskas of the LSDP faction. “We need 94 votes. I don’t know if we can gather that many – that’s a lot.”

Some legal experts argue that an MP should lose their mandate if a court finds them guilty of a crime. “If the Constitutional Court says a person has grossly violated the constitution, that should be the end of it,” Nekrošius said. But politicians remain cautious. “A multi-stage decision-making process is better than a single decision because it reduces the risk of error,” Sabatauskas noted. Širinskienė added: “I don’t know if we need to drastically change the constitution for this. I think MPs should first be guided by their conscience.”